Foster v. Spitzer

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence E. Kahn, U.S. District Judge

DECISION AND ORDER

By Decision and Order filed March 5, 2007, the Court dismissed Petitioner Peter M. Foster Petition for habeas corpus relief without prejudice to petitioner's right to seek federal habeas corpus relief upon complete exhaustion of his available state court remedies. Dkt. No. 3 at 4. Petitioner appealed that dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Dkt. No. 5. By Mandate filed April 17, 2007, the Second Circuit dismissed the appeal without prejudice to the appeal being reinstated within thirty (30) days from the entry of an order by this Court granting or denying a certificate of appealability ("COA"). Dkt. No. 9.

Petitioner has not submitted a request for a COA separate from his notice of appeal in this action. The Second Circuit has held, however, that a notice of appeal may be construed as a motion for a COA. SeeMarmolejo v. United States, 196 F.3d 377, 378 (2d Cir. 1999) (citing Hooper v. United States, 112 F.3d 83, 88 (2d Cir.1997)). Accordingly, the notice of appeal filed by petitioner is hereby deemed to also constitute a request for a COA. Appeals to the Court of Appeals in habeas corpus proceedings are governed by 28 U.S.C. § 2253, which provides in relevant part that:

(c) (1) Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability, an appeal may not be taken to the court of appeals from --

(A) the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court; or

A COA may only be issued "if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

After reviewing the file, and for the reasons set forth in the Court's prior Decision and Order in this action, the Court finds that the petitioner has failed to make the showing required for issuance of a COA. Therefore, the Court denies his request.

Turning to petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis during the appeal of his case, petitioner states that he was recently granted in forma pauperis status in state court and seeks to rely on that determination. Dkt. No. 6. However, because petitioner has not previously sought in forma pauperis status in this action,*fn2 and because he has not supported his present application with an affidavit detailing his current financial situation, his request is incomplete and denied without prejudice to renew.

Petitioner also seeks the appointment of counsel. Dkt. No. 6. This request is not properly before this Court and the motion is hereby denied, without prejudice to renew before the Court of Appeals.

WHEREFORE, it is hereby

ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court docket a copy of petitioner's notice of appeal (Dkt. No. 5) as petitioner's request for a COA; and it is further

ORDERED, that petitioner's application for a COA (Dkt. No. 10) is denied; and it is further

ORDERED, that petitioner's in forma pauperis application (Dkt. No. 6) is denied as incomplete, without ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.